http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0931-4674
Figures
Abstract
Background
Metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) treatment depends on life expectancies. Data regarding palliative decompression outcomes is scarce. We demonstrate that surgical timing has a significant impact on survival in MSCC patients treated with palliative decompression.
Methods
Eighty-nine consecutive MSCC patients at a tertiary referral medical center were enrolled between January 2012 and February 2016. Wide laminectomy was performed for tumors invading the vertebral body. Debulking surgery was done for tumors damaging the posterior column of the spine. Patient records were retrospectively analyzed.
Results
Better survival was observed in patients with preoperative intact motor function (Group A, n = 37) than in those with motor deficit (Group B, n = 52, p = 0.0031). In Group B, survival was better in those who underwent surgery within 7 days of motor deficit onset than in those who underwent surgery 7 days after onset (p = 0.0444) and in postoperative ambulant patients than in nonambulant patients (p = 0.0120). In Group B, Frankel grade improved in patients who underwent surgery within 48 h than in those who underwent surgery after 48 h (p = 0.0992). Group A patients had a shorter hospital stay and higher revised Tokuhashi score than Group B patients. Overall survival was better in patients with a lower Tomita score (≤5, p = 0.0012), higher revised Tokuhashi score (≥9, p = 0.0009), better preoperative Frankel grade (p < 0.0001), and younger age (≤55 years, p = 0.0179). There were no significant differences in age, sex, tumor type, involved vertebrae level, Tomita score, intraoperative blood loss, operation time, incidence of infection, and postoperative complications between groups.
Citation: Lo W-Y, Yang S-H (2017) Metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) treated with palliative decompression: Surgical timing and survival rate. PLoS ONE 12(12): e0190342. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190342
Editor: Jonathan H. Sherman, George Washington University, UNITED STATES
Received: August 7, 2017; Accepted: December 13, 2017; Published: December 29, 2017
Copyright: © 2017 Lo, Yang. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) is a challenging condition for surgeons to treat. It develops in 5%–10% of all cancer patients and in 40% of patients with preexisting nonspinal bone metastasis [1].
Treatments for patients with MSCC differ based on their life expectancies [2, 3]. To improve the quality of life, patients with a life expectancy of more than 3–6 months may undergo surgery [4, 5]. The increasing number of patients with a longer life expectancy has raised the demand for decompression surgery.
Factors influencing surgical outcomes are of utmost importance. Previous studies demonstrated that surgery within 48 h of the onset of motor deficits led to better neurological outcomes [6, 7, 8]. In addition, palliative decompression followed by radiotherapy led to better survival and functional outcome than radiotherapy alone [4, 8, 9]. A lower preoperative Tomita score and a higher revised Tokuhashi score also led to better prognosis [10, 11, 12]. There is a strong correlation between the preoperative ambulatory function and survival rate. The better the preoperative ambulatory function the higher the survival rate [13, 14, 15, 16]. Studies also agree that a better postoperative ambulatory function leads to a higher survival rate [11, 17].
However, there are limited data on the effects of surgical timing on patient survival or the outcomes of palliative decompression. Studies discussing surgical timing have focused on neurological recovery instead of survival. Studies discussing survival did not mention surgical timing.
The current retrospective cohort study including 89 consecutive MSCC patients who underwent palliative decompression between January 2012 and February 2016 at a tertiary referral medical center. The outcomes were evaluated by survival time and Frankel grade [18] improvement. This study demonstrates that surgical timing can have a significant impact on the survival rate of MSCC patients treated with palliative decompression. Other factors, which may influence patient survival, are discussed, including age, postoperative Frankel grade [18], the Tomita score [3], and the revised Tokuhashi score [12, 19].
Materials and methods
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
The protocol and the request for the waiver of informed consent have been approved by the Research Ethics Committee D of the National Taiwan University Hospital, and were fully ratified in the 55th meeting of Research Ethics Committee. The committee is organized under, and operates in accordance with, the Good Clinical Practice guidelines and governmental laws and regulations. The data were analyzed anonymously.
Consecutive patients with MSCC, who were diagnosed by radiographic findings and clinical symptoms, underwent palliative decompression between January 2012 and February 2016 at a tertiary referral medical center. The patients were followed for at least 2 years after palliative decompression, and most of them died within 2 years. The inclusion criteria were MSCC with a known or unknown primary cancer treated with palliative decompression and a tissue-proven diagnosis of a solid primary tumor or cancers of the blood and lymph glands. The exclusion criteria included patients with spinal metastasis who received corpectomy for more aggressive removal of metastatic tumor, vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty procedures without decompression, or only radiotherapy. Patients with central nervous system origin of metastatic tumors were also excluded.
Surgical techniques
All patients underwent palliative decompression and posterior stabilization. For tumors invading the vertebral body, wide laminectomy was performed; for tumors destroying the posterior column of the spine, debulking surgery was performed. Patients received postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy, as required. The surgical indications were deficit in sensory, motor, or sphincter function, as well as back pain caused by instability.
Clinical evaluations
All data were retrospectively collected through medical records including age, sex, survival time, Frankel grade change (Table 1) [18], type of primary tumor, location of the metastatic tumor involving the vertebrae, length of hospital stay, blood loss, operation time, complications, Tomita scores (Table 2) [3, 10], and revised Tokuhashi scores (Table 3) [12, 19]. The type of primary tumor was classified into three groups—rapid growth tumors (lung cancer, gastric cancer, esophageal cancer, cancer of the ampulla of Vater, cholangiocarcinoma, and hepatocellular carcinoma), moderate growth tumors (myeloma, leukemia, lymphoma, oral cancer, renal cell carcinoma, and others not listed), and slow growth tumors (colorectal cancer, breast cancer, and prostate cancer), which were determined using the revised Tokuhashi score system [12, 19]. The location of the metastatic spinal tumor was divided into cervical, upper thoracic (T1–T6), lower thoracic (T7–T12), lumbar, and sacral. When more than one location was involved, the most proximal location operated was representative. The length of hospital stay had acute and chronic stage, i.e., postoperative hospitalization in an orthopedic or neurosurgical ward and total hospitalization (including referral to oncological and/or internal medicine ward), respectively.
Statistical analysis
Statistical analyses were performed using MedCalc for Windows version 16.8 (MedCalc Software, Ostend, Belgium). Survival data were computed using Kaplan–Meier survival analysis. All data that rejected normality were analyzed using Mann–Whitney U test, whereas those with accepted normality were analyzed using an independent t test. Categorical data were analyzed using Fisher’s exact test or Chi-square test. Paired data not normally distributed were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. All p values of <0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Results
Eighty-nine (89) patients who underwent palliative decompression for MSCC between January 2012 and February 2016 were enrolled, including 35 (39.3%) females and 54 (60.7%) males. Mean age at the time of surgery was 56.8 ± 1.3 years (range 27–85). Bone metastasis was confirmed with histology and magnetic resonance imaging. Patients were divided into a preoperative intact motor function group (Group A, n = 37) and a preoperative motor deficit group (Group B, n = 52). Group B was further subdivided into a group that underwent surgery within 48 h of onset of motor deficit (Group B1, n = 18) and one that underwent surgery after 48 h (Group B2, n = 34). Another categorization of Group B was based on the operation performed within or after 7 days (early surgery group, n = 39; delayed surgery group, n = 13; Fig 1).
Patients were divided into a preoperative intact motor function group (Group A, n = 37) and a preoperative motor deficit group (Group B, n = 52). Group B was further subdivided into a group that underwent surgery within 48 h of onset of motor deficit (Group B1, n = 18) and one that underwent surgery after 48 h (Group B2, n = 34). Another categorization of Group B was based on the operation performed within or after 7 days (early surgery group, n = 39; delayed surgery group, n = 13).
Patient characteristics
There were no statistically significant differences between Groups A and B in age (p = 0.54), sex (p = 1.00), preoperative Tomita score (p = 0.0992), blood loss (p = 0.19), operation time (p = 0.09), postoperative infection rate (p = 1.00), site of primary tumor (p = 0.15), or level of operated spinal involvement (p = 0.79). Group A had a shorter postoperative hospital stay in both acute (in orthopedic or neurosurgical ward) (p = 0.0047) and chronic stages (total length of hospitalization, including referral to other departments) (p = 0.0032); in addition, it had a better preoperative revised Tokuhashi score (p < 0.0001, Table 4).
There were no statistically significant differences between Groups B1 and B2 in age (p = 0.92), sex (p = 0.08), acute stage hospital stay (p = 0.63), chronic stage hospital stay (p = 0.29), Tomita score (p = 0.43), revised Tokuhashi score (p = 0.07), blood loss (p = 0.47), operation time (p = 0.24), postoperative infection rate (p = 0.42), site of primary tumor (p = 0.21), or level of operated spinal involvement (p = 0.70, Table 5).
Survival analysis
The median for postoperative overall survival was 182 days with 95% confidence interval (CI) of 132–219 days. The estimated survival rates at 3, 6, and 12 months were 70.8%, 49.3%, and 28.7%, respectively. The median survival was 338 days in Group A (95% CI: 132–599) and 150 days in Group B (95% CI: 105–198). The observed survival was better in Group A than in Group B (p = 0.0031; Fig 2), but was not significantly different between Groups B1 and B2 (p = 0.52).
Observed survival was better in Group A (intact motor function, n = 37) than in Group B (motor deficit, n = 52, p = 0.0031).
In Group B (n = 52), the median survival was 176 days for patients who underwent surgery within 7 days (n = 39, 95% CI: 115–217) and 87 days for those who underwent surgery after more than 7 days (n = 13, 95% CI: 36–168). Survival rate was thus better in patients who underwent surgery within 7 days than in those who underwent surgery after 7 days (p = 0.0444; Fig 3). There were no significant differences in Tomita score and revised Tokuhashi score between the two subgroups in Group B (early operation group: before 7 days; delayed operation group: after 7 days). The p values in Tomita score and revised Tokuhashi score were 0.1332 and 0.1848 respectively.
In Group B (motor deficit), survival was better in patients who underwent surgery within 7 days (n = 39) than in those who did after 7 days (n = 13, p = 0.0444).
In Group B, patients who were postoperatively ambulant (Frankel grade D and E) had a median survival of 164 days (n = 34, 95% CI: 105–256), whereas those who were nonambulant (Frankel grade A–C) had a median survival of 115 days (n = 18, 95% CI: 58–176). Better survival was observed in postoperative ambulant patients than in nonambulant patients in Group B (p = 0.0120; Fig 4).
Better survival was observed in postoperative ambulant patients (n = 34) than in nonambulant patients (n = 18) in Group B (motor deficit, p = 0.0120).
Neurological outcome
In Group B, earlier surgery within 48 h (Group B1, n = 18) led to an average improvement by one Frankel grade. In patients whose surgery was delayed for more than 48 h, there was no improvement in Frankel grade. There were no statistically significant differences in Frankel grade improvement (p = 0.0992; Fig 5) between the groups. Comparing pre and postoperative Frankel grade by Wilcoxon signed-rank test in Group B1 yielded an improvement tendency (p = 0.0674; S1 Fig), but it was not observed in Group B2 (p = 0.9723; S2 Fig). Surgery within 48 h seemed to improve the neurological outcome.
Group B (motor deficit) was subdivided into the group that underwent surgery within 48 h (Group B1, n = 18) and those who did after 48 h (Group B2, n = 34). Comparing both groups, there were no statistically significant differences in Frankel grade change (p = 0.0992).
Factors influencing survival
Among the 89 MSCC patients treated with palliative decompression, lower Tomita score (≤5 points), higher revised Tokuhashi score (≥9 points), better preoperative Frankel grade, and younger age (≤55 years) all led to better survival.
Patients with a Tomita score of ≤5 points (n = 33, median survival: 286 days, 95% CI: 193–691) had a significantly better survival than those with ≥6 points (n = 56, median survival: 124 days, 95% CI: 92–188; p = 0.0012; Fig 6). Patients with a revised Tokuhashi score of ≥9 points (n = 35, median survival: 225 days, 95% CI: 168–962) had significantly better survival than those with ≤8 points (n = 54, median survival: 149 days, 95% CI: 87–198; p = 0.0009, Fig 7).
Patients with a Tomita score of ≤5 points (n = 33) had significantly better survival than those with ≥6 points (n = 56, p = 0.0012).
Patients with revised Tokuhashi score of ≥9 points (n = 35) had significantly better survival than those with ≤8 points (n = 54, p = 0.0009).
Patients were divided into five groups, according to preoperative Frankel grade (A–E). Survival was significantly different between the five groups (p < 0.0001). Better survival was observed in patients with grades closer to E. In addition, patients aged ≤55 years (n = 40, median survival: 200 days, 95% CI: 149–490) had significantly better survival than those aged ≥56 years (n = 49, median survival: 168 days, 95% CI: 104–202; p = 0.0179; Fig 8).
Patients aged ≤55 years (n = 40) had significantly better survival than those aged ≥56 years (n = 49; p = 0.0179).
Discussion
This study analyzed 89 patients with MSCC who received palliative decompression. Comparing the patients who underwent palliative decompression with intact motor function (Group A) and motor deficit (Group B), the former had a significantly better survival and higher revised Tokuhashi score (p = 0.0031 and <0.0001, respectively). Palliative decompression led to better survival in MSCC patients before the onset of motor deficit. Patients had better revised Tokuhashi score at that time and it was related to better survival [20, 21]. In our study, the difference in survival by revised Tokuhashi score between Groups A and B was significant (p < 0.0001). The revised Tokuhashi score is composed of 6 categories. We found that the difference in survival outcome between Groups A and B was most dependent upon the performance status and degree of palsy, which deeply influence the revised Tokuhashi score. In other categories of revised Tokuhashi score and Tomita score, no significant differences were found between Groups A and B. It implies that operation before palsy (Group A) leads to a better survival. In previous studies, with better Tomita or revised Tokuhashi score, more aggressive intervention is suggested, such as en bloc, wide, or marginal excision [2, 3]. Our study demonstrates that palliative decompression achieves acceptable outcome in patients with good Tomita or revised Tokuhashi score.
In Group B, surgery within 48 h led to Frankel grade improvement, albeit not statistically significant (p = 0.0992). Surgery delayed for less than 7 days had better survival (p = 0.0444) than those delayed for more than 7 days. There were no significant differences in Tomita and revised Tokuhashi scores between the two subgroups in Group B. It implied that better survival was not related to better scores. Emergency surgery within 48 h tended to improve neurological outcome, whereas delaying up to 7 days still achieved a better survival than delaying it for more than 7 days. These findings are compatible with the literature that emergency surgery leads to better neurological recovery [7, 22, 23]. However, limited studies have shown that emergency surgery results in better survival. Park et al. analyzed MSCC patients from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and found better survival was related to surgery within 72 h [17]. The difference may be due to different patient groups (NSCLC vs. multiple types of tumor) and different surgical techniques. We focused on palliative decompression and excluded other types of surgery, such as vertebral column resection. To our knowledge, this is the first study showing that preoperative motor deficit MSCC patients have a better survival, despite the delay of palliative decompression up to 7 days.
Several studies demonstrate that survival is better in preoperative ambulant patients [13, 14, 15, 16]. Preoperative ambulatory status has a positive effect on postoperative ambulatory outcome [13, 20, 24, 25, 26]. However, few data are available to prove that survival is better in postoperative ambulant patients [11, 17]. One report showed that the functional outcomes did not directly influence patient survival [27]. This study focused only on thoracic spine, and multiple types of surgical techniques were enrolled, leading to different results regarding postoperative ambulation and survival. Our study exhibits that under palliative decompression, postoperative ambulant patients have better survival.
Tomita score and revised Tokuhashi score are widely applied in predicting survival in MSCC patients [20, 21, 28, 29]. In a prospective study by Morgen et al., the author classified both Tomita score and revised Tokuhashi score into three groups and found significantly different survival between the three groups [21]. Our study classified patients into only two groups and achieved significance at the cut-off point of 5 for the Tomita score, and 9 for the revised Tokuhashi score.
In a previous study, patients with a Tomita score of ≤5 points were suggested to receive intralesional, marginal, or wide excision. [10] Palliative decompression that was originally considered for patients with a Tomita score of ≥6 points was applied to those patients (≤5 points), which still resulted in a better survival. In patients with a revised Tokuhashi score of ≥9 points, the predicted survival was more than 6 months. Excisional surgery was considered in case of a single lesion that did not metastasize to major internal organs. [19] We performed palliative decompression in those patients and still achieved a better survival.
For the present study showed for the first time that among MSCC patients treated with palliative decompression, those ≤55 years have a significantly better survival than those ≥56 years. It implies that younger patients may benefit more from palliative decompression.
Overall, patients can benefit from an earlier operation when diagnosed with MSCC in different stages, irrespective of the occurrence of motor deficits. An operation performed before the occurrence of motor deficits can lead to a better survival. After the onset of motor deficits, an early operation performed within 48 h could improve neurological recovery. Delaying surgery within 7 days still improves the survival, although at that time point (2–7 days), neurological recovery could not be significantly improved.
There are three major limitations in the present study. First, it was a retrospective nonrandomized study, and the decisions on surgery were not determined using the same criteria. Second, detailed chemotherapy and radiotherapy options were not reviewed. However, the patients in our study had up to 14 types of different tumor origins, and discussing chemotherapy or radiotherapy between different tumor types was hard to draw a conclusion. Third, the sample size was relatively small (n = 89). In the future, a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial enrolling a large number of patients will be of high value to verify the key factors influencing survival in MSCC patients.
Conclusion
We can improve the survival of MSCC patients with palliative decompression before motor deficit onset. After the occurrence of motor deficits, the survival can still be improved with early surgery within 7 days of the onset. Overall survival was better in patients aged ≤55 years.
Supporting information
S1 Fig. Paired pre and postoperative Frankel grade in Group B1.
Comparing pre and postoperative Frankel grade by Wilcoxon signed-rank test in Group B1 yielded an improvement tendency (p = 0.0674). The Y-axis is Frankel grade (1 = grade A, 2 = grade B, 3 = grade C, 4 = grade D, 5 = grade E).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190342.s001
(TIF)
S2 Fig. Paired pre and postoperative Frankel grade in Group B2.
There was no significant difference between pre and postoperative Frankel grade in Group B2 (p = 0.9723). The Y-axis is Frankel grade (1 = grade A, 2 = grade B, 3 = grade C, 4 = grade D, 5 = grade E).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190342.s002
(TIF)
Acknowledgments
We thank the Department of Orthopedics and Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital for their permission to analyze these cases. The authors would like to thank Enago (www.enago.tw) for the English language review.
References
- 1. Schmidt MH, Klimo P Jr, Vrionis FD. Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2005 Sep;3(5):711–9. pmid:16194459
- 2. Mattana JL, Freitas RR, Mello GJ, Neto MA, Freitas Filho Gd, Ferreira CB, et al. Study on the applicability of the modified Tokuhashi score in patients with surgically treated vertebral metastasis. Rev Bras Ortop. 2015 Nov;46(4):424–30. pmid:27027033
- 3. Murakami H, Kawahara N, Demura S, Kato S, Yoshioka K, Sasagawa T, et al. Perioperative complications and prognosis for elderly patients with spinal metastases treated by surgical strategy. Orthopedics. 2010 Mar;33(3):165–8.
- 4. Lee CH, Kwon JW, Lee J, Hyun SJ, Kim KJ, Jahng TA, et al. Direct decompressive surgery followed by radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression: a meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014 Apr;39(9):E587–92.
- 5. Nemelc RM, Stadhouder A, van Royen BJ, Jiya TU. The outcome and survival of palliative surgery in thoraco-lumbar spinal metastases: contemporary retrospective cohort study. Eur Spine J. 2014 Nov;23(11):2272–8. pmid:24659388
- 6. Chaichana KL, Woodworth GF, Sciubba DM, McGirt MJ, Witham TJ, Bydon A, et al. Predictors of ambulatory function after decompressive surgery for metastatic epidural spinal cord compression. Neurosurgery. 2008 Mar;62(3):683–92; discussion 683–92. pmid:18425015
- 7. Fürstenberg CH, Wiedenhöfer B, Gerner HJ, Putz C. The effect of early surgical treatment on recovery in patients with metastatic compression of the spinal cord. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Feb;91(2):240–4. pmid:19190061
- 8. Patchel RA, Tibbs PA, Regine WF, Payne R, Saris S, Kryscio RJ, et al. Direct decompressive surgical resection in the treatment of spinal cord compression caused by metastatic cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet. 2005 Aug;366(9486):643–8. pmid:16112300
- 9. Kim JM, Losina E, Bono CM, Schoenfeld AJ, Collins JE, Katz JN, et al. Clinical outcome of metastatic spinal cord compression treated with surgical excision ± radiation versus radiation therapy alone: a systematic review of literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Jan 1;37(1):78–84.
- 10. Bauer H, Tomita K, Kawahara N, Abdel-Wanis ME, Murakami H. Surgical strategy for spinal metastases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 May 15;27(10):1124–6.
- 11. Park JH, Rhim SC, Jeon SR. Efficacy of decompression and fixation for metastatic spinal cord compression: analysis of factors prognostic for survival and postoperative ambulation. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2011 Nov;50(5):434–40. pmid:22259690
- 12. Tokuhashi Y, Matsuzaki H, Oda H, Oshima M, Ryu J. A revised scoring system for preoperative evaluation of metastatic spine tumor prognosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Oct;30(19):2186–91.
- 13. Helweg-Larsen S, Sørensen PS, Kreiner S. Prognostic factors in metastatic spinal cord compression: a prospective study using multivariate analysis of variables influencing survival and gait function in 153 patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 Mar;46(5):1163–9. pmid:10725627
- 14. Lei M, Li J, Liu Y, Jiang W, Liu S, Zhou S. Who are the best candidates for decompressive surgery and spine stabilization in patients with metastatic spinal cord compression?: a new scoring system. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016 Sep;41(18):1469–76.
- 15. Lei M, Liu Y, Liu S, Wang L, Zhou S, Zhou J. Individual strategy for lung cancer patients with metastatic spinal cord compression. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 May;42(5):728–34. pmid:26924783
- 16. Lei M, Liu Y, Yan L, Tang C, Yang S, Liu S. A validated preoperative score predicting survival and functional outcome in lung cancer patients operated with posterior decompression and stabilization for metastatic spinal cord compression. Eur Spine J. 2016 Dec;25(12):3971–8. pmid:26507323
- 17. Park SJ, Lee CS, Chung SS. Surgical results of metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): analysis of functional outcome, survival time, and complication. Spine J. 2016 Mar;16(3):322–8. pmid:26586194
- 18. Frankel HL, Hancock DO, Hyslop G, Melzak J, Michaelis LS, Ungar GH, et al. The value of postural reduction in the initial management of closed injuries of the spine with paraplegia and tetraplegia. I. Paraplegia. 1969 Nov;7(3):179–92. pmid:5360915
- 19. Tokuhashi Y, Ajiro Y, Umezawa N. Outcome of treatment for spinal metastases using scoring system for preoperative evaluation of prognosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Jan;34(1):69–73.
- 20. Moon KY, Chung CK, Jahng TA, Kim HJ, Kim CH. Postoperative survival and ambulatory outcome in metastatic spinal tumors: prognostic factor analysis. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2011 Sep;50(3):216–23. pmid:22102952
- 21. Morgen SS, Nielsen DH, Larsen CF, Søgaard R, Engelholm SA, Dahl B. Moderate precision of prognostic scoring systems in a consecutive, prospective cohort of 544 patients with metastatic spinal cord compression. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2014 Dec;140(12):2059–64. pmid:25035249
- 22. Crnalic S, Hildingsson C, Bergh A, Widmark A, Svensson O, Löfvenberg R. Early diagnosis and treatment is crucial for neurological recovery after surgery for metastatic spinal cord compression in prostate cancer. Acta Oncol. 2013 May;52(4):809–15. pmid:22943387
- 23. Quraishi NA, Rajagopal TS, Manoharan SR, Elsayed S, Edwards KL, Boszczyk BM. Effect of timing of surgery on neurological outcome and survival in metastatic spinal cord compression. Eur Spine J. 2013 Jun;22(6):1383–8. pmid:23275041
- 24. Park JH, Jeon SR. Pre- and postoperative lower extremity motor power and ambulatory status of patients with spinal cord compression due to a metastatic spinal tumor. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 Jun;38(13):E798–802.
- 25. Putz C, Gantz S, Bruckner T, Moradi B, Helbig L, Gerner HJ, et al. Preoperative scoring and limits of prognostication: functional outcome after surgical decompression in metastatic spinal cord compression. Oncology. 2014;86(3):177–84. pmid:24751899
- 26. Putz C, van Middendorp JJ, Pouw MH, Moradi B, Rupp R, Weidner N, et al. Malignant cord compression: A critical appraisal of prognostic factors predicting functional outcome after surgical treatment. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine. 2010 Jul;1(2):67–73. pmid:21572627
- 27. Chong S, Shin SH, Yoo H, Lee SH, Kim KJ, Jahng TA, et al. Single-stage posterior decompression and stabilization for metastasis of the thoracic spine: prognostic factors for functional outcome and patients’ survival. Spine J. 2012 Dec;12(12):1083–92. pmid:23168136
- 28. Quraishi NA, Manoharan SR, Arealis G, Khurana A, Elsayed S, Edwards KL, et al. Accuracy of the revised Tokuhashi score in predicting survival in patients with metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC). Eur Spine J. 2013 Mar;22 Suppl 1:S21–6.
- 29. Tabouret E, Cauvin C, Fuentes S, Esterni B, Adetchessi T, Salem N, et al. Reassessment of scoring systems and prognostic factors for metastatic spinal cord compression. Spine J. 2015 May;15(5):944–50. pmid:24120144